Given the ease that someone can put the installer on virtually any bit of memory they so desire, it may be a non issue except to the most technically challenged of people (who should probably just get an iPad).
Well, digging around in application packages is not something you expect an average Mac user to be able to manage, even the ones that have to do stuff you can't do on an iPad.
At WWDC, Apple announced that there will be no physical medium for Lion, so the only install DVDs will be DIY (if that will even be possible with the release version).
if you actually want to use a modern version of the API, you need to do a lot of faffing about checking for extensions, and get a pointer to a fnction bofre actually using it.
Or you could use GLEW, which does all that for you and works really well under Windows.
FWIW, if you don't trust anybody, you can easily host your own OpenID service, running on a server or even your own computer (but that requires your computer be adressable from the internet).
It also requires that you're better at keeping a server secure than the admins at Google or whatever OpenID provider you could be using.
But, I believe that if I buy an iPad at retail, I can use it in whatever promotional capacity I see fit as long as I do not violate Apple's IP.
Hmm isn't mentioning Apple, iPad or somesuch in your promotional material already a violation of Apple's IP? Unless they grant you permission for it, that is.
I already tried it and it works fine, but I'm a bit stumped at why the hell I'd want to create a presentation on an iPhone??? It's already a bit of a kludge on the iPad.
The biggest new feature in Keynote is that you can connect an Keynote Remote to it now. That means you can remote control your iPad from your iPhone in presentations! Even better, the reverse also works, you can remote control your iPhone that's hooked to a beamer via an iPad (or another iPhone/iPod touch). WHY????
I'm not so sure. Simpler instruction set means that it requires more instructions to run the same operations, which means that the emulator has to execute more stuff (fetching, interpreting, etc). To optimize performance, you probably need an instruction set that matches the JavaScript commands as closely as possible (so more complicated instructions are run by the browser directly, not in JavaScript). You can probably gain the most by really using the Math library, instead of implementing stuff like logarithm/sine/power in emulated instructions.
I write hard SF. I go to great effort to get details right, although I know most of my readers will neither notice nor care. As long as I entertain them, that's fine -- and it's important that the details don't get in the way of that entertainment. However there are a few who will notice, who may even do the math. They're the ones I take that extra effort for.
Being a big fan of hard SF and very technically-minded myself, I appreciate your attention to detail, but be aware that you're doing that mostly for your own peace of mind. For example, there are so many faults in the Harry Potter series that somebody even wrote a whole book about that (called Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality), and see what disaster it meant to J. K. Rowling's sales.
If my personal info is not stored anywhere how am I at risk to security threats?
Well, if you consider the transport connection more insecure than the server (so I'm not talking about Sony here), that's actually true. If your connection is potentially compromised, it's better to not transmit the cc details for every sale.
While I understand your philosophy, I don't quite see it that way. When only 1% of your audience understands what you're presenting them, you have completely failed to consider your audience when planning your performance, which is actually the most important thing.
I'm in software development, and it's the same thing: My audience doesn't care whether I created perfectly clean code for my implementation, so why should I? There has to be some other benefit to it.
It's the same in hardware marketing: The people don't care whether the computer has a CPU with 3.2GHz or 2.8GHz, so why advertise that?
Mac computers will one day be every bit as closed off as iPhones and iPads, with all software having to come through the Mac app store the same way it has to now with the iPhone/iPad app stores. Everything Apple will then be a walled garden, with Apple as gatekeepers.
When I played around in Mac OS X 10.7, I had a short vision of the Launchpad being the launched-by-default application instead of Finder. The result of this would be that it would be virtually impossible for novices to install third party applications (since you need the Finder for that), except through the Mac App Store. This would not require a lockdown of the system, but still achieve the same result. I'm pretty sure they want to do exactly that sooner or later.
On the plus side, professionals could still launch Finder to do their dirty file-and-folder work (note that Photoshop and other professional apps are not in the Mac App Store), however smaller devs (like myself) will be forced onto the Mac App Store route (even more than they are now already). All that's required is a tiny change in some XML file somewhere.
You get a certificate from Apple (for $99/year), which allows you to run apps you compiled with xcode4 (which is in the store already). These you can submit to the Mac App Store for distribution.
The technology for that is already in place, it's just not enforced.
I didn't ask for my money back. However, especially with the huge success you'd think that they'd have some time for getting the thing to actually work.
Yes, they rolled their own engine based on XNA, which seems to be very picky about graphics cards. I got it on Steam, but still haven't been able to run it, even though my system is well within the specs (runs Crysis2 just fine etc). Crashes with some Direct3D exception.
What made me angry was their comment on the Steam forums about those isses was (paraphrased) "Do you want us to make the game compatible with a wider range of cards, or add more features? Obviously we opted for more features." If so many folks can't run your game because it's so picky, they don't care about more features, because they're never going to seem them.
Every error is a human error. Either somebody used it incorrectly, or somebody built it in a way where it couldn't handle the way it's used. IMO the only exception to this rule are things you can't be expected to consider, like a plane crashing into your data center or a Richter scale 9 earthquake.
You may attempt a rebuttal claiming that Apple doesn't want to support any unsanctioned hardware, and go on about "complete experience", but I'll shoot you down immediately because I install ALL of my O.S.s in a virtual machine -- there is no "hardware differences" that Apple's software would have to support except the lack of a hardware DRM system that Apple uses to prevent me from installing their inferior OS on my superior hardware.
And you know what? Apple doesn't care about your fringe desires. Just as Microsoft doesn't care, it's just that their solution happens to work on your machine. In business, you have to learn that you can't please everyone, and that you have to reduce your target customer base to whatever is most profitable, otherwise you'll never have a shipping product.
Slashdot Mirror
Given the ease that someone can put the installer on virtually any bit of memory they so desire, it may be a non issue except to the most technically challenged of people (who should probably just get an iPad).
Well, digging around in application packages is not something you expect an average Mac user to be able to manage, even the ones that have to do stuff you can't do on an iPad.
At WWDC, Apple announced that there will be no physical medium for Lion, so the only install DVDs will be DIY (if that will even be possible with the release version).
It's not electronic-only. It's electronic additionally. They're still making DVDs for it. It's an OS after all...
No, GP was correct. There will be no DVDs for this one.
if you actually want to use a modern version of the API, you need to do a lot of faffing about checking for extensions, and get a pointer to a fnction bofre actually using it.
Or you could use GLEW, which does all that for you and works really well under Windows.
How can the hackers be foreign if we're the *international* monetary fund?
Aliens?
FWIW, if you don't trust anybody, you can easily host your own OpenID service, running on a server or even your own computer (but that requires your computer be adressable from the internet).
It also requires that you're better at keeping a server secure than the admins at Google or whatever OpenID provider you could be using.
But, I believe that if I buy an iPad at retail, I can use it in whatever promotional capacity I see fit as long as I do not violate Apple's IP.
Hmm isn't mentioning Apple, iPad or somesuch in your promotional material already a violation of Apple's IP? Unless they grant you permission for it, that is.
I already tried it and it works fine, but I'm a bit stumped at why the hell I'd want to create a presentation on an iPhone??? It's already a bit of a kludge on the iPad.
The biggest new feature in Keynote is that you can connect an Keynote Remote to it now. That means you can remote control your iPad from your iPhone in presentations! Even better, the reverse also works, you can remote control your iPhone that's hooked to a beamer via an iPad (or another iPhone/iPod touch). WHY????
That won't help people who check their mails monthly (and I know some of those).
I think it's a really, really bad idea.
So you just spent an entire paragraph on explaining the opposing side's line of reasoning, but don't mention your own at all?
I actually read "Human Acolytes Developed from Stem Cells" and was a bit puzzled.
I'm not so sure. Simpler instruction set means that it requires more instructions to run the same operations, which means that the emulator has to execute more stuff (fetching, interpreting, etc). To optimize performance, you probably need an instruction set that matches the JavaScript commands as closely as possible (so more complicated instructions are run by the browser directly, not in JavaScript). You can probably gain the most by really using the Math library, instead of implementing stuff like logarithm/sine/power in emulated instructions.
Remind me to never vote for you if you run for office :)
I write hard SF. I go to great effort to get details right, although I know most of my readers will neither notice nor care. As long as I entertain them, that's fine -- and it's important that the details don't get in the way of that entertainment. However there are a few who will notice, who may even do the math. They're the ones I take that extra effort for.
Being a big fan of hard SF and very technically-minded myself, I appreciate your attention to detail, but be aware that you're doing that mostly for your own peace of mind. For example, there are so many faults in the Harry Potter series that somebody even wrote a whole book about that (called Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality), and see what disaster it meant to J. K. Rowling's sales.
Intel would care to disagree.
I guess that's why they nowadays give their processors fancy names like Pentium, Itanium, Core Duo and i7 instead of 80386/33, 80486/40, 8088?
Besides that, Intel's main customers are large companies like Apple and Dell. They do care about the specs, but they're not what I'd call "people".
If my personal info is not stored anywhere how am I at risk to security threats?
Well, if you consider the transport connection more insecure than the server (so I'm not talking about Sony here), that's actually true. If your connection is potentially compromised, it's better to not transmit the cc details for every sale.
Always play for those five."
While I understand your philosophy, I don't quite see it that way. When only 1% of your audience understands what you're presenting them, you have completely failed to consider your audience when planning your performance, which is actually the most important thing.
I'm in software development, and it's the same thing: My audience doesn't care whether I created perfectly clean code for my implementation, so why should I? There has to be some other benefit to it.
It's the same in hardware marketing: The people don't care whether the computer has a CPU with 3.2GHz or 2.8GHz, so why advertise that?
Why aren't you launching from Hawaii?
My guess is because Hawaii joined the US in 1957, but the space program got started in 1955.
Mac computers will one day be every bit as closed off as iPhones and iPads, with all software having to come through the Mac app store the same way it has to now with the iPhone/iPad app stores. Everything Apple will then be a walled garden, with Apple as gatekeepers.
When I played around in Mac OS X 10.7, I had a short vision of the Launchpad being the launched-by-default application instead of Finder. The result of this would be that it would be virtually impossible for novices to install third party applications (since you need the Finder for that), except through the Mac App Store. This would not require a lockdown of the system, but still achieve the same result. I'm pretty sure they want to do exactly that sooner or later.
On the plus side, professionals could still launch Finder to do their dirty file-and-folder work (note that Photoshop and other professional apps are not in the Mac App Store), however smaller devs (like myself) will be forced onto the Mac App Store route (even more than they are now already). All that's required is a tiny change in some XML file somewhere.
You get a certificate from Apple (for $99/year), which allows you to run apps you compiled with xcode4 (which is in the store already). These you can submit to the Mac App Store for distribution.
The technology for that is already in place, it's just not enforced.
I didn't ask for my money back. However, especially with the huge success you'd think that they'd have some time for getting the thing to actually work.
Yes, they rolled their own engine based on XNA, which seems to be very picky about graphics cards. I got it on Steam, but still haven't been able to run it, even though my system is well within the specs (runs Crysis2 just fine etc). Crashes with some Direct3D exception.
What made me angry was their comment on the Steam forums about those isses was (paraphrased) "Do you want us to make the game compatible with a wider range of cards, or add more features? Obviously we opted for more features." If so many folks can't run your game because it's so picky, they don't care about more features, because they're never going to seem them.
Every error is a human error. Either somebody used it incorrectly, or somebody built it in a way where it couldn't handle the way it's used. IMO the only exception to this rule are things you can't be expected to consider, like a plane crashing into your data center or a Richter scale 9 earthquake.
The UI needs to be re-written to use Silverlight, but the functional code can be re-used without any modification in many cases.
That requires a clean MVC implementation, which most probably didn't do.
They'll probably go web-based, but then you're depending on the WiFi in the hospital.
Dunno about Windows Phone 7, but the iPhone runs offline HTML5 apps just fine (sans the new js engine, unfortunately).
You may attempt a rebuttal claiming that Apple doesn't want to support any unsanctioned hardware, and go on about "complete experience", but I'll shoot you down immediately because I install ALL of my O.S.s in a virtual machine -- there is no "hardware differences" that Apple's software would have to support except the lack of a hardware DRM system that Apple uses to prevent me from installing their inferior OS on my superior hardware.
And you know what? Apple doesn't care about your fringe desires. Just as Microsoft doesn't care, it's just that their solution happens to work on your machine. In business, you have to learn that you can't please everyone, and that you have to reduce your target customer base to whatever is most profitable, otherwise you'll never have a shipping product.